Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AZAM versus THE STATE

The accused accused of acting in self-defense at the time of the prediction of the definition of sections 302 (b) and 324 evidence was not supported by his statement, prosecution case or defense evidence. On the contrary, the witnesses' behavior in this case and the cross-examination tendency had negated his plea that the wounds inflicted on the victim showed that he had been subjected to a sharp knife and, thus, to the accused. One has to know that there are such injuries. It is possible that the accused could not account for the wounds found on his body as the cause of his death. The fact that the accused had knife wounds was not proved by medical evidence, nor was the record found on his body in the case. The incident occurred momentarily, or whether the suspect had acted under intense and sudden provocation was fully supported by the recovery of medical evidence and a knife, in which the alleged misdemeanor disputed it. Was. Injuries, although according to his own statement, did not happen in a derogatory manner by the prosecution, but he failed to prove the same conviction. The trial court did not give the defendants any reason for the lesser punishment but the accused. There was no reduction in favor, but since he had already served his life imprisonment, he could not be converted. The accused in the death were charged with torturing the victim and causing fatal injury to the deceased without any justification. The accused, under Section 302 (b) and 324, was not sentenced to 14 years in jail for extraordinary amnesty. P immigration advocates from Chicha watni lawyer